[Vo]:Software pkg for vortex-L

[William Beaty]

Rather than google or yahoo groups, here are two I've heard about which 
can be hosted locally, so archive and functions have nothing to do with 
outside companies.  Not in the cloud, and can't be spidered by google. 
It's the next best thing to writing your own code, supposedly.


   Citadel, bbs  ("rooms" can be email lists)
   http://citadel.org

   http://groupserver.org

the very old one was "mailman"

Any other suggestions?



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:brief writeup on Ron Maimon's theory of Augur deuterons

[Axil Axil]

A theory of the magnetic field diffusion is developed in order to explain
high-energy x-ray emission observed in vacuum spark plasmas. The
acceleration mechanism is based on the intense induced electric field due
to an abrupt inductance change when the plasma column expands from its
pinch radius to a large radius. According to this magnetic field diffusion
model, high-energy electrons are well collimated at the axis. In addition,
the electron energy in this collimated flux can be easily more than 20
times the electrode voltage, which generates high-energy x-ray radiation by
interaction with the dense plasma.


A 1-kJ vacuum-spark device has been developed as a pulsed X-ray source for
applications in the field of microlithography, microscopy, flash
radiography, etc.

The optimization works for the pulsed soft-X-ray emission are presented.
The optimization was made in two steps: 1) X-ray emission maximization and
2) X-ray emission reproducibility. For the X-ray emission maximization, the
changed parameters were the main capacitor energy, the anode-cathode
geometry, the anode material, and the trigger pulse amplitude.

The best combination is [u]1 kJ for the main capacitor energy[/u], a
[u]conical shape for the anode[/u], [u]6-12 mm anode-cathode
separation[/u], [u]iron for the anode material, and 14-15 kV for the
trigger pulse amplitude[/u]. In these conditions, energies of up to 10 J
per pulse are obtained in the 3-40 keV range for the X-ray pulses. In order
to have a good reproducibility, [i]a high-power, very fast, high-voltage
trigger pulse is required.[/i] To fulfill these conditions, a pulse
transformer and an air spark gap were added to the initial triggering
device (a magnetic pulse compression circuit). With the new trigger pulse
(20 J per pulse, 50-ns rise-time, 22-kV amplitude in an open circuit), an
acceptable X-ray emission reproducibility was obtained


The take away: success is all in the way you all build your spark.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> I got ahold of Ron at physics.stackexchange.com and asked some questions
>> to help bring his theory down to the realm of hobbyists [2].  Some
>> interesting points came out of that chat, including these:
>>
>
> Another interesting point I forgot to mention is that Ron suggested
> somewhere that you might see a large energy release when loaded Pd/D is
> irradiated with x-rays (possibly a dangerous amount of energy).  This
> suggests some fun experiments that could be attempted in an adjacent room
> or in one's backyard, if one could get ahold of a x-ray cathode ray tube.
>
> Eric
>
>

Re: [Vo]:brief writeup on Ron Maimon's theory of Augur deuterons

[Eric Walker]

I wrote:

I got ahold of Ron at physics.stackexchange.com and asked some questions to
> help bring his theory down to the realm of hobbyists [2].  Some interesting
> points came out of that chat, including these:
>

Another interesting point I forgot to mention is that Ron suggested
somewhere that you might see a large energy release when loaded Pd/D is
irradiated with x-rays (possibly a dangerous amount of energy).  This
suggests some fun experiments that could be attempted in an adjacent room
or in one's backyard, if one could get ahold of a x-ray cathode ray tube.

Eric

[Vo]:brief writeup on Ron Maimon's theory of Augur deuterons

[Eric Walker]

Here is a brief writeup on Ron Maimon's theory of what might be called
"Augur deuterons" [1].  It's not that different from the thread that went
over this list a few weeks ago, but I had a chance to chat with Ron to
clarify some of the details.  To recapitulate, he's positing that when a
charged particle or an x-ray interacts with a palladium atom in a palladium
lattice loaded with deuterium in such a way as to cause the ionization of
an inner shell electron, it is likely that ~20 keV will be imparted to a
nearby deuteron.  This particular amount of energy is significant, since it
is adequate to cause d+d fusion in a beam of deuterium nuclei.

I got ahold of Ron at physics.stackexchange.com and asked some questions to
help bring his theory down to the realm of hobbyists [2].  Some interesting
points came out of that chat, including these:

* The imparting of the 20 keV from a decaying K-shell hole in the palladium
atom is expected to be the dominant channel when there is a deuteron in
close proximity; apparently the density of states of the deuterium nucleus
(if I can be permitted to use the term -- I have no idea what it means in
any precise sense) is such that the energy is more likely to be imparted to
the deuteron in the form of electrostatic repulsion than to an electron --
what would otherwise have been an Augur electron or an electron filling the
decaying hole, leading to a characteristic photon. This makes the energetic
deuteron an "Augur deuteron."
* Ron thinks the ROI, as Robin referred to it, is sufficient to keep the
reaction going; i.e., a traveling daughter alpha particle will not be so
slowed down by its inefficient ionization of outer shell electrons as to
fail to ionize enough inner shell electrons.

I'm curious, Robin, if you know offhand of some back-of-the-envelope
calculations that would help to get a more precise handle on whether the
process would be too inefficient to sustain itself.

Eric

p.s., I just discovered another, simpler description of Ron's theory in a
comment Ron left on an earlier post of mine, when I was enthusiastic about
Widom and Larson's theory [3].

[1] http://rolling-balance.blogspot.com/2013/01/ron-maimons-theory.html
[2] http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/6594/2012/12/3
[3]
http://rolling-balance.blogspot.com/2011/12/physics-stackexchange-posts.html?showComment=1352836304228#c3555790009270996231

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[William Beaty]

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Michele Comitini wrote:


Anonymity could be allowed in front of the payment of a (small) fee,
no refunds!!


Nah, just free.  Prove your IRL existence, and supply a serious need for 
staying hidden.  Academic politics is the big one.



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Martin Ford book "Lights in the Tunnel" reviewed in WaPost

[Daniel Rocha]

This is what I thought when I read the paper:

"In essence, Ford is hypothesizing that Marx may just turn out to have been
a little ahead of his time when he talked about capitalism’s
“contradictions.” Eventually capital will concentrate in fewer and fewer
hands (in tomorrow’s case, the robot owners’), and surging unemployment
will combine with sagging wages to undermine the mass markets capitalism
requires in order to function."

Indeed, that book, at least in the beginning, feels like it is very
ressonant with the historical parts of The Capital, specially the ones with
more historical description, vol.1, ch.15, "THE DEVELOPMENT OF MACHINERY",
specially sections 5, "The Strife Between Workman and Machine" and section
6, "THE THEORY OF COMPENSATION AS REGARDS THE WORKPEOPLE DISPLACED BY
MACHINERY"
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch15.htm




2013/1/9 Jed Rothwell 

> It is about time this book got some nationwide attention. See:
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/matt-miller-the-robots-are-coming/2013/01/09/caac3e0a-5a57-11e2-88d0-c4cf65c3ad15_story.html
>



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

[Vo]:Martin Ford book "Lights in the Tunnel" reviewed in WaPost

[Jed Rothwell]

It is about time this book got some nationwide attention. See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/matt-miller-the-robots-are-coming/2013/01/09/caac3e0a-5a57-11e2-88d0-c4cf65c3ad15_story.html

Re: [Vo]:Invitation to connect on LinkedIn

[Terry Blanton]

Architect.  Figures.  :-)

[Vo]:The two vortexes

[Vorl Bek]

I can't tell the difference between one vortex and the other when
I have downloaded the mail from them.

If I use the mail client filter to dump messages from both into
the same folder, and I am subscribed to both, my reply to a
message is transparent to me as to which vortex I am replying to.

It seems that might allow fans of someone banned at one place to
stay in the loop with the bannee.

Re: [Vo]:And thanks for all the fish

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Why not hold off on that? Stick around. Interesting stuff is in the works
> for ICCF18.

Yeah, and you will miss fast-fingered Akira's rapid reporting.

Re: [Vo]:And thanks for all the fish

[Jed Rothwell]

Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:

Unfortunately, Abd was one of the list's most interesting contributors and
> commentators.
>

Bill Beaty is a forgiving kinda guy and I predict he will let Abd back in
again soon. I just un-blocked Abd myself.



> But I'm outta here.
>

Why not hold off on that? Stick around. Interesting stuff is in the works
for ICCF18.

- Jed

[Vo]:Peswiki : Yildiz / Turkish Magnetic Motor 30-day University Test

[Alan Fletcher]

Old news :  Magnet motor demonstrated at Delft University  (2010)


Doesn't run long enough to demonstrate non-fake, but broken down into fairly 
small sub-assemblies.

BSMH-Yildiz' All-Magnet-Motor 30-Day University Test Pending


Was originally planned as a 3-day test in a hotel room, now rescheduled as a 
30-day test at Eindhoven U.
Q and A on background

Assistant Professor Presents Scientific Model for Yildiz Magnet Motor


Strong endorsement by Jorge L. Duarte, who is an Associate Professor of 
Electromechanics and Power Electronics at Eindhoven University of Technology. 
(I think he's seen the full internals under an NDA.)

He also proposes a theory 

(Not that I really trust engineers with fundamental theories).

Yildiz Tells the Story about His Magnet Motor


Answers questions about his background (with scans of legal documents in 
German)indicating that one of his partners did the scamming, and he was fully 
exonerated.  

Home page, gallery of photos and videos

Re: [Vo]:Rob Duncan in Columbia Tribune

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Oops. Sorry. Google Alerts found it again and brought it forth anew.
>
> I did not check the date.

No, I enjoyed reading it again.  I just wanted to be sure I wasn't
missing something.

I see the Trib shows it with a 2013 copyright.  Maybe they rewebbed it.  :-)

Re: [Vo]:Rob Duncan in Columbia Tribune

[Jed Rothwell]

Terry Blanton wrote:


Is there some reason this merits review?  It was over 13 mos. ago.


Oops. Sorry. Google Alerts found it again and brought it forth anew.

I did not check the date.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rob Duncan in Columbia Tribune

[Alan Fletcher]

> From: "Jed Rothwell" 
> See:
> http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/education/mu-research-chief-wants-cold-fusion-puzzle-solved/article_fc6e3c0e-fc22-5d1f-a60e-6920d4c67d4d.html?_dc=717654100619.2565

As usual, Krivit jumps in : 

... [Krivit] thinks the fundamental question already has been answered.  “It is 
not a good use of public money to try to figure out the question of whether the 
process is fusion or not, or nuclear versus chemical. The evidence for that 
already exists, abundantly,” he said. “It is nuclear, and it is not fusion.”

Yeah, right. 

Duncan : “There are going to be more and more people like Professor Rossi 
popping up with empirical results that no one really fundamentally 
understands,” he said. “Whether there’s something here or not, it makes a lot 
of sense to systematically be working on this.”

Re: [Vo]:Rob Duncan in Columbia Tribune

[Terry Blanton]

Is there some reason this merits review?  It was over 13 mos. ago.

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> See:
>
> http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/education/mu-research-chief-wants-cold-fusion-puzzle-solved/article_fc6e3c0e-fc22-5d1f-a60e-6920d4c67d4d.html?_dc=717654100619.2565
>

Re: [Vo]:INFN/Stmicro paper: Modification of Pd-H2 and Pd-D2 thin films processed by He-Ne laser...

[mixent]

In reply to  Jeff Berkowitz's message of Wed, 19 Dec 2012 22:28:38 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Thanks for posting the link. There has been work like this at Lecce for
>many years. I've posted this link before.
>http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Castellanonucleartra.pdf

Quote:

"Generally the bubbles were created near to the cracks, see Fig. 2. This result
indicates that the formation of the bubbles is tied to the formation of the
cracks. "

...eh no, it indicates that the formation of the cracks was tied to the
formation of the bubbles.

Clearly in fig. 2, the cracks originate at the bubbles then spread outward. This
is to be expected when a hot plasma forms locally due to considerable energy
release, creating pressure on the surrounding metal, resulting in cracks
spreading out from the point of maximum stress.

In short, the cracks are not the cause, they are the effect.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

[Vo]:Rob Duncan in Columbia Tribune

[Jed Rothwell]

See:

http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/education/mu-research-chief-wants-cold-fusion-puzzle-solved/article_fc6e3c0e-fc22-5d1f-a60e-6920d4c67d4d.html?_dc=717654100619.2565

RE: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[Chris Zell]

I vaguely recall an old article in the New Scientist that theorized that Great 
Big Nuclei ( such as the fabled element 115) could throw off radiated 
particles, yanking them out of the virtual realm.

Re: [Vo]:And thanks for all the fish

[Alain Sepeda]

Oh...
too bad. His "columns" were nice.

2013/1/9 Jeff Berkowitz 

> Unfortunately, Abd was one of the list's most interesting contributors and
> commentators. So your decision, while nice on paper, effectively declares
> victory for the troll. It's your list. But I'm outta here.
>
> Jeff Berkowitz
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[David Roberson]

Yes, that is what I understand, but the energy of the radiation results in a 
loss of mass from the Black Hole.  I believe that is why they are supposed to 
evaporate.


An interesting discussion was conducted earlier where several of us were 
blundering our way through general relativity in association with black holes.  
One issue that arose was that a photon that is released just outside of the 
black hole boundary would essentially be non existent once it climbed the 
gravitational well of the hole into open space.  It would take an infinite 
amount of photon energy at the exact boundary to reach the outside world with 
any significant energy.


Do you know  how that can be reconciled with the theory of vaporization of 
holes?  It appears like a paradox to me.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Jan 9, 2013 1:27 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
> I would be impressed if it were possible to generate positrons and the
> associated electrons from virtual pairs.

There is one place where this definitely occurs; at the event horizon
of a black hole.  It is the nature of Hawking Radiation.

In theory.


 

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
> I would be impressed if it were possible to generate positrons and the
> associated electrons from virtual pairs.

There is one place where this definitely occurs; at the event horizon
of a black hole.  It is the nature of Hawking Radiation.

In theory.

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[Harry Veeder]

Have you considered automatically limiting the number of messages  a
member can post daily?
Even a voluntary limit would help, but this would have to be stated *explicitly*
in the rules. Four or five seems like a reasonable number.
Harry

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:48 AM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
> Below are two long-standing but unwritten rules of vortex-L:
>
>   1. DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  If someone is insulting, then you are required
>   to put their address in local killfile.   If you don't know what trolls
>   are, and aren't familiar with this issue, do not subscribe to vortex-L
>
>   2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
>   our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
>   messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
>   mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
>   identity.
>
> I won't be enforcing the second one until I set up an archive system which
> is private, members-only.  I'm looking at groupware services which duplicate
> the "groups" function at yahoo and google (both of which have major issues
> which we've discussed, and I've very intentionally avoided migrating to
> either one.) But today there are at least three other options.
>
>
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[Michele Comitini]

Anonymity could be allowed in front of the payment of a (small) fee,
no refunds!!

mic


2013/1/9 leaking pen :
> Hah!  No, I'm Alexander Hollins, at some point gmail started putting an old
> pen name (pun intended) as my first and last. I'm still not sure how that
> change happened, as I didn't do it
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:03 AM, David Roberson  wrote:
>>
>> Leaking, I thought that was your real name! :-) Some sort of foreign name
>> thing.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: leaking pen 
>> To: vortex-l 
>> Sent: Wed, Jan 9, 2013 11:58 am
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules
>>
>> I'll be completely honest. My insults back at JoJo were intentional, and
>> horrible behavior. I shouldn't have done it.
>>
>> Also, Bill, I'm trying to sign up on the list on an email that contains my
>> name, and I'm not getting a response. Is signup still turned off?
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM, William Beaty  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Vorl Bek wrote:
>>>
 Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
 necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
 people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm an internet troll myself, and I recognize one of my own.  I've never
>>> met any incincere, intentional trolls, but I've encountered numbers of my
>>> own type online, plus the occasional one on vortex.  The problem is easy to
>>> see from inside.
>>>
>>> We trolls live in a reality-warp, a dishonest world, we're buried in
>>> major psychological projection and hypocrisy.  We refuse to take the tinyest
>>> responsibility for our actions, or to ever view them in a bad light.  Any
>>> problems which "inexplicably" arise are always, always, someone elses'
>>> fault, and we're expert at convincing others that this is true.  Most of us
>>> keep up a conversation where we apply derogatory labels to those around us,
>>> with glowing descriptions of ourselves.  Hence we're usually delivering
>>> obvious insults to others, while labeling our own rotten behavior as pure
>>> and justifed deeds.
>>>
>>> Me, I suspect that most of us got this way from physical/emotional abuse
>>> as children.  But I've only heard about this from a very few.  For excessive
>>> details on this type of troll or "flamer personality,"  See:
>>>
>>>   Flamer Personality Disorder
>>>   http://amasci.com/weird/flamer
>>>
>>>   MS Peck, "The People of the Lie"
>>>   http://www.amazon.com/People-Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/0684848597
>>>
>>>
 The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
 sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
 the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.
>>>
>>>
>>> If both sides *label* their oppenent's insults as grevious disgusting
>>> slanders, while *labeling* their own insults as justified responses or "I'm
>>> just telling you truths about yourself"  ...then you're dealing with trolls.
>>> The constant dishonest labeling is the symptom.  The hypocricy is the
>>> symptom, e.g. my own misbehavior is pure and justifed and beyond reproach,
>>> while your *identical* misbehavior is completely disgusting and requires
>>> prompt retribution.  (But outsiders see things differently. Well, they do if
>>> they can avoid being drawn into the troll's campaign of distortion.
>>> Attempting to see things from the troll's viewpoint can be a big mistake.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
>>> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
>>> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
>>> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
>>> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>>>
>>
>

[Vo]:And thanks for all the fish

[Jeff Berkowitz]

Unfortunately, Abd was one of the list's most interesting contributors and
commentators. So your decision, while nice on paper, effectively declares
victory for the troll. It's your list. But I'm outta here.

Jeff Berkowitz

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[leaking pen]

Hah!  No, I'm Alexander Hollins, at some point gmail started putting an old
pen name (pun intended) as my first and last. I'm still not sure how that
change happened, as I didn't do it

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:03 AM, David Roberson  wrote:

> Leaking, I thought that was your real name! :-) Some sort of foreign name
> thing.
>
>  Dave
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: leaking pen 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Wed, Jan 9, 2013 11:58 am
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules
>
>  I'll be completely honest. My insults back at JoJo were intentional, and
> horrible behavior. I shouldn't have done it.
>
>  Also, Bill, I'm trying to sign up on the list on an email that contains
> my name, and I'm not getting a response. Is signup still turned off?
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Vorl Bek wrote:
>>
>>  Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
>>> necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
>>> people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.
>>>
>>
>>  I'm an internet troll myself, and I recognize one of my own.  I've never
>> met any incincere, intentional trolls, but I've encountered numbers of my
>> own type online, plus the occasional one on vortex.  The problem is easy to
>> see from inside.
>>
>> We trolls live in a reality-warp, a dishonest world, we're buried in
>> major psychological projection and hypocrisy.  We refuse to take the
>> tinyest responsibility for our actions, or to ever view them in a bad
>> light.  Any problems which "inexplicably" arise are always, always, someone
>> elses' fault, and we're expert at convincing others that this is true.
>>  Most of us keep up a conversation where we apply derogatory labels to
>> those around us, with glowing descriptions of ourselves.  Hence we're
>> usually delivering obvious insults to others, while labeling our own rotten
>> behavior as pure and justifed deeds.
>>
>> Me, I suspect that most of us got this way from physical/emotional abuse
>> as children.  But I've only heard about this from a very few.  For
>> excessive details on this type of troll or "flamer personality,"  See:
>>
>>   Flamer Personality Disorder
>>   http://amasci.com/weird/flamer
>>
>>   MS Peck, "The People of the Lie"
>>   
>> http://www.amazon.com/People-**Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/**0684848597
>>
>>
>>  The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
>>> sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
>>> the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.
>>>
>>
>>  If both sides *label* their oppenent's insults as grevious disgusting
>> slanders, while *labeling* their own insults as justified responses or "I'm
>> just telling you truths about yourself"  ...then you're dealing with
>> trolls.  The constant dishonest labeling is the symptom.  The hypocricy is
>> the symptom, e.g. my own misbehavior is pure and justifed and beyond
>> reproach, while your *identical* misbehavior is completely disgusting and
>> requires prompt retribution.  (But outsiders see things differently. Well,
>> they do if they can avoid being drawn into the troll's campaign of
>> distortion.  Attempting to see things from the troll's viewpoint can be a
>> big mistake.)
>>
>>
>>
>> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
>> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
>> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
>> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
>> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[David Roberson]

Leaking, I thought that was your real name! :-) Some sort of foreign name thing.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: leaking pen 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Jan 9, 2013 11:58 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules


I'll be completely honest. My insults back at JoJo were intentional, and 
horrible behavior. I shouldn't have done it. 


Also, Bill, I'm trying to sign up on the list on an email that contains my 
name, and I'm not getting a response. Is signup still turned off?


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM, William Beaty  wrote:

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Vorl Bek wrote:


Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.



I'm an internet troll myself, and I recognize one of my own.  I've never met 
any incincere, intentional trolls, but I've encountered numbers of my own type 
online, plus the occasional one on vortex.  The problem is easy to see from 
inside.

We trolls live in a reality-warp, a dishonest world, we're buried in major 
psychological projection and hypocrisy.  We refuse to take the tinyest 
responsibility for our actions, or to ever view them in a bad light.  Any 
problems which "inexplicably" arise are always, always, someone elses' fault, 
and we're expert at convincing others that this is true.  Most of us keep up a 
conversation where we apply derogatory labels to those around us, with glowing 
descriptions of ourselves.  Hence we're usually delivering obvious insults to 
others, while labeling our own rotten behavior as pure and justifed deeds.

Me, I suspect that most of us got this way from physical/emotional abuse as 
children.  But I've only heard about this from a very few.  For excessive 
details on this type of troll or "flamer personality,"  See:

  Flamer Personality Disorder
  http://amasci.com/weird/flamer

  MS Peck, "The People of the Lie"
  http://www.amazon.com/People-Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/0684848597



The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.



If both sides *label* their oppenent's insults as grevious disgusting slanders, 
while *labeling* their own insults as justified responses or "I'm just telling 
you truths about yourself"  ...then you're dealing with trolls.  The constant 
dishonest labeling is the symptom.  The hypocricy is the symptom, e.g. my own 
misbehavior is pure and justifed and beyond reproach, while your *identical* 
misbehavior is completely disgusting and requires prompt retribution.  (But 
outsiders see things differently. Well, they do if they can avoid being drawn 
into the troll's campaign of distortion.  Attempting to see things from the 
troll's viewpoint can be a big mistake.)



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci





 

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[David Roberson]

I would be impressed if it were possible to generate positrons and the 
associated electrons from virtual pairs.  This would imply that a source of 
energy has been created as you suggest since the two could get together 
releasing real energy into the region of space where they exist.  I tend to 
believe in the overall COE and this would violate that belief unless the same 
amount of energy disappeared at some other location.


Call me old fashioned, but I still do not accept the appearance of energy out 
of nothing.  Locate an atom that looses mass to compensate and you are good.  
Perhaps I would accept energy coming from a field of some sort, but that field 
must then be demonstrated to have less net energy than before the conversion to 
positrons.


I have been watching the entanglement of particles with anticipation, but so 
far there is no clear evidence of energy transfer at a distance in zero time.  
Information seems to be connected, but I do not see how that could be 
understood in the form of energy transfer.  One day this may become common, but 
I am not aware of any evidence.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Jan 9, 2013 11:38 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Alain Sepeda  wrote:
> This patent seems unrelated to LENR. Production of antimatter.
> I don't see the immediate application, except for research (maybe that is
> the goal, help accelerators have antiparticles in mass)

If you could accumulate positrons from virtual pairs in significant
numbers, you would have one hell of an energy source.

You could blow up the Vatican.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angels_%26_Demons


 

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[leaking pen]

I'll be completely honest. My insults back at JoJo were intentional, and
horrible behavior. I shouldn't have done it.

Also, Bill, I'm trying to sign up on the list on an email that contains my
name, and I'm not getting a response. Is signup still turned off?

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM, William Beaty  wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Vorl Bek wrote:
>
>  Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
>> necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
>> people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.
>>
>
> I'm an internet troll myself, and I recognize one of my own.  I've never
> met any incincere, intentional trolls, but I've encountered numbers of my
> own type online, plus the occasional one on vortex.  The problem is easy to
> see from inside.
>
> We trolls live in a reality-warp, a dishonest world, we're buried in major
> psychological projection and hypocrisy.  We refuse to take the tinyest
> responsibility for our actions, or to ever view them in a bad light.  Any
> problems which "inexplicably" arise are always, always, someone elses'
> fault, and we're expert at convincing others that this is true.  Most of us
> keep up a conversation where we apply derogatory labels to those around us,
> with glowing descriptions of ourselves.  Hence we're usually delivering
> obvious insults to others, while labeling our own rotten behavior as pure
> and justifed deeds.
>
> Me, I suspect that most of us got this way from physical/emotional abuse
> as children.  But I've only heard about this from a very few.  For
> excessive details on this type of troll or "flamer personality,"  See:
>
>   Flamer Personality Disorder
>   http://amasci.com/weird/flamer
>
>   MS Peck, "The People of the Lie"
>   
> http://www.amazon.com/People-**Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/**0684848597
>
>
>  The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
>> sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
>> the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.
>>
>
> If both sides *label* their oppenent's insults as grevious disgusting
> slanders, while *labeling* their own insults as justified responses or "I'm
> just telling you truths about yourself"  ...then you're dealing with
> trolls.  The constant dishonest labeling is the symptom.  The hypocricy is
> the symptom, e.g. my own misbehavior is pure and justifed and beyond
> reproach, while your *identical* misbehavior is completely disgusting and
> requires prompt retribution.  (But outsiders see things differently. Well,
> they do if they can avoid being drawn into the troll's campaign of
> distortion.  Attempting to see things from the troll's viewpoint can be a
> big mistake.)
>
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Alain Sepeda  wrote:
> This patent seems unrelated to LENR. Production of antimatter.
> I don't see the immediate application, except for research (maybe that is
> the goal, help accelerators have antiparticles in mass)

If you could accumulate positrons from virtual pairs in significant
numbers, you would have one hell of an energy source.

You could blow up the Vatican.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angels_%26_Demons

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[William Beaty]

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Vorl Bek wrote:


Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.


I'm an internet troll myself, and I recognize one of my own.  I've never 
met any incincere, intentional trolls, but I've encountered numbers 
of my own type online, plus the occasional one on vortex.  The problem is 
easy to see from inside.


We trolls live in a reality-warp, a dishonest world, we're buried in major 
psychological projection and hypocrisy.  We refuse to take the tinyest 
responsibility for our actions, or to ever view them in a bad light.  Any 
problems which "inexplicably" arise are always, always, someone elses' 
fault, and we're expert at convincing others that this is true.  Most of 
us keep up a conversation where we apply derogatory labels to those around 
us, with glowing descriptions of ourselves.  Hence we're usually 
delivering obvious insults to others, while labeling our own rotten 
behavior as pure and justifed deeds.


Me, I suspect that most of us got this way from physical/emotional abuse 
as children.  But I've only heard about this from a very few.  For 
excessive details on this type of troll or "flamer personality,"  See:


  Flamer Personality Disorder
  http://amasci.com/weird/flamer

  MS Peck, "The People of the Lie"
  http://www.amazon.com/People-Lie-Hope-Healing-Human/dp/0684848597


The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.


If both sides *label* their oppenent's insults as grevious disgusting 
slanders, while *labeling* their own insults as justified responses or 
"I'm just telling you truths about yourself"  ...then you're dealing with 
trolls.  The constant dishonest labeling is the symptom.  The hypocricy is 
the symptom, e.g. my own misbehavior is pure and justifed and beyond 
reproach, while your *identical* misbehavior is completely disgusting and 
requires prompt retribution.  (But outsiders see things differently. 
Well, they do if they can avoid being drawn into the troll's campaign of 
distortion.  Attempting to see things from the troll's viewpoint can be a 
big mistake.)



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[William Beaty]

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote:


That is an okay rule but some exceptions may be needed. Cold fusion is
controversial. At some institutions you can get in trouble merely for
expressing interest in it. I know some professional scientists who follow
the field but who must maintain low profiles. Some of them may be here, so
we should cut them some slack.


Yes, this would involve two additions:  permission to anonymize because of 
academic politics, and non-public archives invisible to google.


Groupware would allow more than one discussion section, appearing as 
multiple email lists:  one of these could remain exactly as Vortex is now, 
while another is a professional alt-sci forum more resembling CMNS.  Even 
add a Rossi-only channel, etc.



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[Alain Sepeda]

This patent seems unrelated to LENR. Production of antimatter.
I don't see the immediate application, except for research (maybe that is
the goal, help accelerators have antiparticles in mass)



2013/1/9 Terry Blanton 

> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Akira Shirakawa
>  wrote:
>
> > Additional information from user Renzo of E-CatWorld blog:
>
>
> >> they have applied for a patent
> >> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2319282.html
> >> and the firm is cited in a document by Celani
> >> http://www.22passi.it/downloads/Presentazione_Viareggio_2011b.pdf
> >> L. Gamberale. MOSE SrL, Viale Montegrappa 20, 27029 Vigevano (PV)-Italy.
>
> Breakout of the patent:
>
> http://goo.gl/osvsw
>
>
> http://worldwide.espacenet.com/maximizedOriginalDocument?flavour=maximizedPlainPage&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20100128&CC=WO&NR=2010010434A1&KC=A1
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion European branch

[Terry Blanton]

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Akira Shirakawa
 wrote:

> Additional information from user Renzo of E-CatWorld blog:


>> they have applied for a patent
>> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2319282.html
>> and the firm is cited in a document by Celani
>> http://www.22passi.it/downloads/Presentazione_Viareggio_2011b.pdf
>> L. Gamberale. MOSE SrL, Viale Montegrappa 20, 27029 Vigevano (PV)-Italy.

Breakout of the patent:

http://goo.gl/osvsw

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/maximizedOriginalDocument?flavour=maximizedPlainPage&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20100128&CC=WO&NR=2010010434A1&KC=A1

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[Jed Rothwell]

William Beaty  wrote:

>
>   2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
>   our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
>   messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
>   mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
>   identity.
>

That is an okay rule but some exceptions may be needed. Cold fusion is
controversial. At some institutions you can get in trouble merely for
expressing interest in it. I know some professional scientists who follow
the field but who must maintain low profiles. Some of them may be here, so
we should cut them some slack.

This is similar to the rule enforced by some newspapers, that letters to
the editor must be signed with your real name. They waive that rule in
special cases, such as when you are Chinese and you are describing the
Chinese government's latest effort to suppress freedom of speech at
the *Southern
Weekend* newspaper.

That's a real example. See:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/01/the-southern-weekend-strike-in-china/266939/

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[leaking pen]

shoot, I seem to have resubscribed with the wrong email address. Let me fix
that!

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Alain Sepeda  wrote:

> Those two rules are on a very good way, yet I propose slight deviation, in
> the same spirit.
>
>
> About Feeding a troll, or as said here someone sincere (jojo,  MY, or me
> sometime, or people whom I respect too much to name because I appreciate
> their contribution - even if MY sometime was interesting) that does not
> want to concede a point :
>
> I have a personal policy, to give data, propose reasoning, not for the
> "troll"/"stone head"/"convinced man" but for the "lurkers" and "the
> archive" ... some fact checking, proposing a position, reminding
> controversy... it feed the troll and the question is when to stop
> feeding... maybe when you have to repeat, but good troll don't get caught
> in a cycle, but move the target in new place... "don't feed the troll" is a
> precaution principle, maybe too precautionous... anyway have to stop. there
> must be a "timeout".
>
>
>
> About anonymity, I agree partially, yet I prefer checked pseudonymity.
> In my case, I imagine that most people know my other LENR pseudonym in the
> community, and some know my name, that sadly you can get in 5 second
> because of... ...pfff...
> I just don't want to have my boss google me talking of non-consensual
> industry, incompatible with the company image and strategy. My professional
> ethic ask me to protect my company from my private position.
>
> If people here, who agree not to spread (more than already done) my ID,
> want to see my name and CV, I will give link... anyway with 5 minute of
> search you can identify me... I just wan't to be protected from quick
> google.
>
> but I understand that some higher executive, might prefer to be
> pseudonymized, yet checked by "trusted authorities" here.
>
>
>
> another policy I've heard about defining what is an abuse (from women
> organization) is that sometime it is hard to define what is
> "non-consensual", but when the other party ("trusted authorities" here)
> says that if have to stop, continuing is abuse.
> Same for something repeated too often...
> The result is not very formal, but it works in real life...
>
>
>
>
> 2013/1/9 Vorl Bek 
>
>> >
>> > Below are two long-standing but unwritten rules of vortex-L:
>> >
>> >1. DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  If someone is insulting, then you are
>> required
>> >to put their address in local killfile.   If you don't know what
>> trolls
>> >are, and aren't familiar with this issue, do not subscribe to
>> vortex-L
>>
>> Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
>> necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
>> people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.
>>
>> The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
>> sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
>> the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.
>>
>> That would make it difficult to put the insulter in a killfile,
>> but I agree that is what needs to be done - unless you want to
>> give them the option of keeping the rubbish in vortexb.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
>> >our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
>> >messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
>> >mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
>> >identity.
>> >
>> > I won't be enforcing the second one until I set up an archive system
>> which
>> > is private, members-only.  I'm looking at groupware services which
>> > duplicate the "groups" function at yahoo and google (both of which have
>> > major issues which we've discussed, and I've very intentionally avoided
>> > migrating to either one.) But today there are at least three other
>> > options.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
>> > William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
>> > billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
>> > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
>> > Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[Alain Sepeda]

Those two rules are on a very good way, yet I propose slight deviation, in
the same spirit.


About Feeding a troll, or as said here someone sincere (jojo,  MY, or me
sometime, or people whom I respect too much to name because I appreciate
their contribution - even if MY sometime was interesting) that does not
want to concede a point :

I have a personal policy, to give data, propose reasoning, not for the
"troll"/"stone head"/"convinced man" but for the "lurkers" and "the
archive" ... some fact checking, proposing a position, reminding
controversy... it feed the troll and the question is when to stop
feeding... maybe when you have to repeat, but good troll don't get caught
in a cycle, but move the target in new place... "don't feed the troll" is a
precaution principle, maybe too precautionous... anyway have to stop. there
must be a "timeout".



About anonymity, I agree partially, yet I prefer checked pseudonymity.
In my case, I imagine that most people know my other LENR pseudonym in the
community, and some know my name, that sadly you can get in 5 second
because of... ...pfff...
I just don't want to have my boss google me talking of non-consensual
industry, incompatible with the company image and strategy. My professional
ethic ask me to protect my company from my private position.

If people here, who agree not to spread (more than already done) my ID,
want to see my name and CV, I will give link... anyway with 5 minute of
search you can identify me... I just wan't to be protected from quick
google.

but I understand that some higher executive, might prefer to be
pseudonymized, yet checked by "trusted authorities" here.



another policy I've heard about defining what is an abuse (from women
organization) is that sometime it is hard to define what is
"non-consensual", but when the other party ("trusted authorities" here)
says that if have to stop, continuing is abuse.
Same for something repeated too often...
The result is not very formal, but it works in real life...



2013/1/9 Vorl Bek 

> >
> > Below are two long-standing but unwritten rules of vortex-L:
> >
> >1. DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  If someone is insulting, then you are
> required
> >to put their address in local killfile.   If you don't know what
> trolls
> >are, and aren't familiar with this issue, do not subscribe to vortex-L
>
> Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
> necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
> people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.
>
> The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
> sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
> the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.
>
> That would make it difficult to put the insulter in a killfile,
> but I agree that is what needs to be done - unless you want to
> give them the option of keeping the rubbish in vortexb.
>
>
> >
> >2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
> >our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
> >messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
> >mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
> >identity.
> >
> > I won't be enforcing the second one until I set up an archive system
> which
> > is private, members-only.  I'm looking at groupware services which
> > duplicate the "groups" function at yahoo and google (both of which have
> > major issues which we've discussed, and I've very intentionally avoided
> > migrating to either one.) But today there are at least three other
> > options.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> > William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> > billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> > Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[Vorl Bek]

> 
> Below are two long-standing but unwritten rules of vortex-L:
> 
>1. DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  If someone is insulting, then you are required
>to put their address in local killfile.   If you don't know what trolls
>are, and aren't familiar with this issue, do not subscribe to vortex-L

Good rule. But to be clear, I don't think the insulters are
necessarily trolls, which are defined, as I understand it, as
people who are insincere and post to get a rise out of others.

The people who took part in the recent rubbish-fest were all
sincere as far as I could tell, and I think they recognized that
the insults directed at them were sincerely meant.

That would make it difficult to put the insulter in a killfile,
but I agree that is what needs to be done - unless you want to
give them the option of keeping the rubbish in vortexb.


> 
>2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
>our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
>messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
>mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
>identity.
> 
> I won't be enforcing the second one until I set up an archive system which 
> is private, members-only.  I'm looking at groupware services which 
> duplicate the "groups" function at yahoo and google (both of which have 
> major issues which we've discussed, and I've very intentionally avoided 
> migrating to either one.) But today there are at least three other 
> options.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[Peter Gluck]

thanks, Bill!
It is clear NOT boycotting totally the trolls is a capital sin against the
forum and community
Peter

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM, William Beaty  wrote:

>
> Below are two long-standing but unwritten rules of vortex-L:
>
>   1. DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  If someone is insulting, then you are required
>   to put their address in local killfile.   If you don't know what trolls
>   are, and aren't familiar with this issue, do not subscribe to vortex-L
>
>   2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
>   our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
>   messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
>   mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
>   identity.
>
> I won't be enforcing the second one until I set up an archive system which
> is private, members-only.  I'm looking at groupware services which
> duplicate the "groups" function at yahoo and google (both of which have
> major issues which we've discussed, and I've very intentionally avoided
> migrating to either one.) But today there are at least three other options.
>
>
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:PLEASE READ, two new rules

[William Beaty]

Below are two long-standing but unwritten rules of vortex-L:

  1. DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  If someone is insulting, then you are required
  to put their address in local killfile.   If you don't know what trolls
  are, and aren't familiar with this issue, do not subscribe to vortex-L

  2. REAL IDENTITIES ONLY.   This is a semi-pro forum, and we all use
  our real names here.  Users will provide linking info in their posted
  messages, such as a "sig" with personal website, Facebook page,
  mailing addr, etc.   Just make sure anyone can verify your real-world
  identity.

I won't be enforcing the second one until I set up an archive system which 
is private, members-only.  I'm looking at groupware services which 
duplicate the "groups" function at yahoo and google (both of which have 
major issues which we've discussed, and I've very intentionally avoided 
migrating to either one.) But today there are at least three other 
options.





(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

[Vo]:Vortex back on, PLEASE READ

[William Beaty]

Jojo Jaro and Abd Lomax are removed to vortexB-L for their off-topic 
troll-battle.


Also below:  new vortex-L rule?

---

So, suddenly after more than a decade, vortex needs a team of moderators?

No.   Moderation isn't the problem.

Vortex-L very intentionally has no rule against insults, and no moderator 
oversight.  The community functions by including people of good character 
who ignore all insults (and who know enough to ostracize those who don't.)


The cause of the recent troubles is not lack of tight moderator control. 
The cause is very old and *very* well-known.  It's a system-wide rule 
which was being completely ignored by the participants.  It's very, very 
simple:


Rule #1:   DO NOT FEED A TROLL.

If someone insults you, do not respond.  What if the insult is grave, and 
attacks your very honor?  Go see rule #1.  Did the other guy start it, and 
you're entirely justified in answering their terrible slander?  Wrong, see 
rule #1.  But their grievous insult is supporting Sectarian Hatred, and 
must be stopped!  No, see rule #1.  And their twisted lies remain in the 
public archive for all to see, forever, and injures the minds of the 
children!  Uh ...I think you need to go see rule #1.


And if you refuse to killfile the troll, and instead try to defend 
yourself, chances are that you'll get banned, and the troll will not.

Not a joke.  Fighting with trolls hurts *you*.

However, with the fall of Usenet and the rise of heavily-moderated 
troll-free forums, it's not just the total newbies who seem unfamiliar 
with the rule of DO NOT FEED A TROLL.  Fairly sophisticated people who 
should know better, they think up all sorts of justifications to indulge 
in gigantic public battles with disgusting enemies.  Perhaps they think 
they can "win?"  No, because true trolls are intellectually dishonest, and 
their irrational reasoning is completely unassailable.  All your effort 
is guaranteed to be wasted.  Which is exactly what the troll wanted. 
"Fighting with pigs only covers you in filth, and the pig enjoys it."


But it's trivially easy to defeat the pig.

Just see rule #1.   Put them in killfile.




From the very first link on the Vortex-L page: http://amasci.com/lists.html


  Flamewars usually are triggered *NOT* when one person intentionally
  insults another, but when one person *takes* insult when reading
  messages having fairly innocent intent.  The offended reader then hurls
  a real insult in return.  Their target feels unjustly attacked, since
  after all they did not send any horrible insults in the first place.
  Therefore they respond with insults of their own.  And so a "war" has
  been triggered through misunderstandings.  Same as with nations.  Same
  as with little kids.  And as with fighting children, the flamewar
  participants will often end up saying "well she started it, I was just
  defending myself!  "No he started it, no she did, no he did," and the
  list owner finally steps in and says "I don't care who started it, you
  both participated, both of you go stand in the corner."

  The solution?  Simple: Be nice.  Don't hurl insults via the list, EVEN
  IF SOMEONE ELSE INSULTED YOUR FIRST.  Avoid acting like a self-important
  boob; don't take insult at every little thing, and don't insist on
  public retaliation for every slight.  Either ask if the insult was
  intentional, or if you must, send your responding attack directly to
  your target via private mail and *not* to the email list.  If you feel
  that someone has unjustly attacked you, and if you feel justified in
  defending yourself IN PUBLIC, then you have fallen for the Flamewar
  psychology.  People with an "eye for an eye" philosophy, those who have
  a need to take retribution for perceived attacks, are no better than
  primitive tribes trapped in cycles of violence, or modern nations who
  start wars for stupid reasons.  On the other hand, if all the real (or
  imagined) insults go right past you with no effect ...then you'd make a
  good email-list moderator!  :)

Now I'm thinking this 'unwritten rule of the internet' needs to be 
included in the vortex-L rules.  Seriously.  People apparently aren't 
aware of it, so it should be made explicit.



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci